Greater Power but Not Strength Gains Using Flywheel Versus Equivolumed Traditional Strength Training in Junior Basketball Players
The main aim of the present study was to compare the effects of flywheel strength training and traditional strength training on fitness attributes. Thirty-six well trained junior basketball players (n = 36; 17.58 ± 0.50 years) were recruited and randomly allocated into: Flywheel group (FST; n = 12),...
| Autores: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad del País Vasco |
| Repositorio: | Addi. Archivo Digital para la Docencia y la Investigación |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:addi.ehu.eus:10810/50089 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10810/50089 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | isoinertial training strength training vertical jump change of direction ability |
| Sumario: | The main aim of the present study was to compare the effects of flywheel strength training and traditional strength training on fitness attributes. Thirty-six well trained junior basketball players (n = 36; 17.58 ± 0.50 years) were recruited and randomly allocated into: Flywheel group (FST; n = 12), traditional strength training group (TST; n = 12) and control group (CON; n = 12). All groups attended 5 basketball practices and one official match a week during the study period. Experimental groups additionally participated in the eight-week, 1–2 d/w equivolume intervention conducted using a flywheel device (inertia = 0.075 kg·m−2) for FST or free weights (80%1 RM) for TST. Pre-to post changes in lower limb isometric strength (ISOMET), 5 and 20 m sprint time (SPR5m and SPR20m), countermovement jump height (CMJ) and change of direction ability (t-test) were assessed with analyses of variance (3 × 2 ANOVA). Significant group-by-time interaction was found for ISOMET (F = 6.40; p = 0.000), CMJ (F = 7.45; p = 0.001), SPR5m (F = 7.45; p = 0.010) and T test (F = 10.46; p = 0.000). The results showed a significantly higher improvement in CMJ (p = 0.006; 11.7% vs. 6.8%), SPR5m (p = 0.001; 10.3% vs. 5.9%) and t-test (p = 0.045; 2.4% vs. 1.5%) for FST compared to the TST group. Simultaneously, th FST group had higher improvement in ISOMET (p = 0.014; 18.7% vs. 2.9%), CMJ (p = 0.000; 11.7% vs. 0.3%), SPR5m (p = 0.000; 10.3% vs. 3.4%) and t-test (p = 0.000; 2.4% vs. 0.6%) compared to the CON group. Players from the TST group showed better results in CMJ (p = 0.006; 6.8% vs. 0.3%) and t-test (p = 0.018; 1.5% vs. 0.6%) compared to players from the CON group. No significant group-by-time interaction was found for sprint 20 m (F = 2.52; p = 0.088). Eight weeks of flywheel training (1–2 sessions per week) performed at maximum concentric intensity induces superior improvements in CMJ, 5 m sprint time and change of direction ability than equivolumed traditional weight training in well trained junior basketball players. Accordingly, coaches and trainers could be advised to use flywheel training for developing power related performance attributes in young basketball players. |
|---|